https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260339 Penalty under Section 11AC was not attracted where disputed Cenvat credit was taken during setting up of a new unit and the dispute turned on whether goods used for supporting structures and installation work qualified as capital goods or inputs. The controversy was interpretational rather than indicative of deliberate evasion, and the credit was reversed with interest after the issue was pointed out. In the absence of suppression or wilful intent to evade duty, the penalty was set aside. en-us Wed, 11 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Jun 2015 07:33:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260339 Penalty under Section 11AC was not attracted where disputed Cenvat credit was taken during setting up of a new unit and the dispute turned on whether goods used for supporting structures and installation work qualified as capital goods or inputs. The controversy was interpretational rather than indicative of deliberate evasion, and the credit was reversed with interest after the issue was pointed out. In the absence of suppression or wilful intent to evade duty, the penalty was set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 11 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260339